among you, then the offender shall be handed over to you in his entirety.” In another wording recorded by Muslim: “and he is surrendered to you.” Thus qasāma stands in the place of direct proof.

Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said concerning the legal force of qasāma: “Judgment is not granted on the basis of a mere allegation, but on the basis of outward evidence whose truth is more probable than not—evidence even weightier than the presumption created by the testimony of two witnesses. That evidence consists of the lūth (strong circumstantial presumption), manifest enmity, or some clear indicator. The Lawgiver reinforced this cause by requiring fifty oaths from the heirs of the slain, for it is unthinkable that all of them would conspire to accuse an innocent man of shed blood that is not his. The Prophet’s statement, ‘Were people to be given judgment on the strength of their claims…,’ does not in any way contradict qasāma, for he negated only the granting of judgment on a naked claim devoid of proof….” End quote.

The jurists have also stated that if someone dies in the crush of people during the Friday prayer or while performing ṭawāf, his blood money is to be paid from the public treasury. This is based on what is related from ʿUmar and ʿAlī: “A man was killed in the crowd at ʿArafah. His family came to ʿUmar, who said, ‘Produce your evidence against his killer.’ ʿAlī said, ‘Commander of the Believers, do not allow the blood of a Muslim to be lost. If you know who killed him, proceed against him; otherwise, pay his blood money from the public treasury.’”